Re: Bug#134658: ITP: lsb -- Linux Standard Base 1.1 core support package
On Feb 20, VomLehn, David wrote:
> The fix for this follows a well-beaten path--we are not the first
> standardization body to make a mistake. Assuming there is nobody who can
> find any reason for the current state of affairs, the very next release
> of the LSB includes, 1) a statement that the requirement that uid and
> gid be one is deprecated and will become obsolete in a future release,
> 2) specify that the plan is to obsolete this requirement in the first
> approved version of the LSB specification after a particular date, and
> 3) deliver on item 2.
Sounds reasonable enough to me, I guess. I think our main concern
over on the Debian side of the aisle is that this will be a sticking
point for conformance; we want to have LSB support, and we'd like to
be as close as possible to full support in woody, and be fully
conformant for woody+1. (Not that we officially have any woody+1
release goals beyond contining the pre-FHS symlink phaseout.)
Anyway, if people on the lsb-spec list want to see how close we are to
conformance (IMHO, of course ;-), the place to start is the start of
the thread (lsb-spec got on a few posts in):
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200202/msg01335.html
and what I have so far (including a few minor fixes) is:
http://people.debian.org/~lawrencc/lsb_1.1.0-2.tar.gz
Chris
--
Chris Lawrence <cnlawren@phy.olemiss.edu> - http://www.lordsutch.com/chris/
Computer Systems Manager, Physics and Astronomy, Univ. of Mississippi
125B Lewis Hall - 662-915-5765
Reply to: